Emergency Legal Filing Seeks to Halt MCPS Plan to Close Wootton High School

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Copilot says:

Under Maryland state law, the process for closing a public school involves several steps to ensure that the decision is made fairly and transparently. The local board of education must consider various factors before making a decision to close a school. These factors include student enrollment trends, the age or condition of school buildings, transportation, educational programs, racial composition of the student body, financial considerations, student relocation, and the impact on the community in the geographic attendance area for the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

The process includes a public hearing to allow citizens to submit their views, adequate notice to parents and guardians of students in attendance at all schools being considered for closure, and a final decision announced at a public session. The final decision must include the rationale for the school closing and address the impact on the factors set forth in the regulation. Additionally, the decision must be announced to the community in the geographic attendance area of the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

It feels like they have done all this except they didn't use the word closure, which makes sense since they are opening the school in a different building.

The Save Wootton people are wasting their money but at least they are helping some lawyers make a nice living.

They haven’t done any of this, and certainly not with the intention of evaluating whether or not Wootton should close because MCPS won’t even call it a closure

Because it's not a closure, it's a relocation (student body staying mostly the same, school administration and teachers staying the same, the only change is a change in building), unless you have a specific definition in the law that says this is actually a closure.

Otherwise, the filing wouldn't have to argue that it's a "de-facto" closure.

1 ES removed and 2 ES added in a different building with a different name in a different city with many new teachers and staff. In other words, it's closing a school and opening a new one by any definition except the one used by people who desperately want to destroy the W schools.

The one ES didn’t want to be with your community. Adding two ES is reasonable. Where is the issue? All schools are having changes.

False. Cold Spring said they wanted to stay with Wootton AT Wootton. But if Wootton was closed and the kids moved to Crown, they preferred the closer option of Churchill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Copilot says:

Under Maryland state law, the process for closing a public school involves several steps to ensure that the decision is made fairly and transparently. The local board of education must consider various factors before making a decision to close a school. These factors include student enrollment trends, the age or condition of school buildings, transportation, educational programs, racial composition of the student body, financial considerations, student relocation, and the impact on the community in the geographic attendance area for the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

The process includes a public hearing to allow citizens to submit their views, adequate notice to parents and guardians of students in attendance at all schools being considered for closure, and a final decision announced at a public session. The final decision must include the rationale for the school closing and address the impact on the factors set forth in the regulation. Additionally, the decision must be announced to the community in the geographic attendance area of the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

It feels like they have done all this except they didn't use the word closure, which makes sense since they are opening the school in a different building.

The Save Wootton people are wasting their money but at least they are helping some lawyers make a nice living.

They haven’t done any of this, and certainly not with the intention of evaluating whether or not Wootton should close because MCPS won’t even call it a closure

Because it's not a closure, it's a relocation (student body staying mostly the same, school administration and teachers staying the same, the only change is a change in building), unless you have a specific definition in the law that says this is actually a closure.

Otherwise, the filing wouldn't have to argue that it's a "de-facto" closure.

1 ES removed and 2 ES added in a different building with a different name in a different city with many new teachers and staff. In other words, it's closing a school and opening a new one by any definition except the one used by people who desperately want to destroy the W schools.

That was part of the boundary study.

Unless you want to argue that Northwest was closed because they had 2 new ES added.

Also, are you also arguing that because admins and teachers leave, that's somehow a closure? My ES has had 3 principals, is each time a closure?

I'm saying it's a different student body in a different building with a different name in a different city with many new teachers and staff. Quite literally everything is changing. The only people pretending it's not a closure are east county W school haters.

Just to clarify: 1) 75% Same student body 2) different building-YES 3) Same name 4) different city-YES but the borders are crazy close together and the total distance between schools is 3 miles 4) many new techers and staff-not unless the current teachers choose not to go. Quite literally, everything is not changing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yah I agree with previous posters that this broad often thinks with what they want and builds an argument around it, that simply isn't how the law works. Relocating a community isn't the same as closing a school. They will have to prove it is a closure before even getting to the "we're mad" part. Getting rid of the name isn't a closure, moving isn't a closure and even consolidating isn't a closure. When you look at what the actual definition and the burden to prove it you will realize how many outs the system has. Im sure some lawyer is involved as they are dipping into the "process wasn't followed" shtick but different actions have different processes. Don't conflate the previous Supreme court case and this farse, one was a hot topic and the other nobody cares about not to mention various legal tie ins.

The, it wouldn’t be any different than what they did at Wheaton which was rebuild in a different location.

You mean 275 feet from the original location?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Copilot says:

Under Maryland state law, the process for closing a public school involves several steps to ensure that the decision is made fairly and transparently. The local board of education must consider various factors before making a decision to close a school. These factors include student enrollment trends, the age or condition of school buildings, transportation, educational programs, racial composition of the student body, financial considerations, student relocation, and the impact on the community in the geographic attendance area for the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

The process includes a public hearing to allow citizens to submit their views, adequate notice to parents and guardians of students in attendance at all schools being considered for closure, and a final decision announced at a public session. The final decision must include the rationale for the school closing and address the impact on the factors set forth in the regulation. Additionally, the decision must be announced to the community in the geographic attendance area of the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

It feels like they have done all this except they didn't use the word closure, which makes sense since they are opening the school in a different building.

The Save Wootton people are wasting their money but at least they are helping some lawyers make a nice living.

No, they are wasting our tax dollars because MCPS will have to defend this frivolous law suit. I hope for a SLAP response (where lovers have to pay winners legal fees)

Were you equally upset when MCPS decided to go all the way to SCOTUS in Mahmoud v. Taylor?

Dad's.

Oh, not this irrelevant stuff again.

Also, SLAPP doesn't apply and it probably won't be too expensive to litigate because it goes to administrative judges.

Mahmoud was litigated by MCPS on ideological grounds. It had an easy off ramp, but it refused to take it.

Prime example of wasted litigation funds by MCPS.

And is the boundary study somehow ideological? They moved a high school because enrollment didn't support opening a new one and they even kept the majority of the boundary together.

The references to Mahmoud are irrelevant.

So it is ok to waste taxpayer money on trendy ideological cases but not on boring procedural cases. Is that your point?

Not PP but actually, yes. I am proud to be part of a system that fights to ensure that religious fanatics don't overtake our schools and that all humans are seen as equal and worthy of inclusion in our curriculum. Although it was a lot of money to spend, it was money spent on an important principle. This will be money spent (wasted) because Wootton parents are big mad about getting bad real estate advice which is not a principle or ethical issue to defend.

Wootton parents are fighting because they believe (rightly or wrongly) that moving to a new school will hurt their children academically. The whole real estate angle is completely bogus and constructed by haters to discredit them.

The fight that you are so proud of was to divert school resources so that every student can learn to spell MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA+, while math and English scores are declining.

[Anonymous]

Isn't something like 75% of the student body *not* changing? That seems standard for what other schools are going through. QO is losing 2(?) elementary schools in FRES and BS, right? I think Poolesville is changing by about 50% with the loss of the magnet and replacing that population with the Darnestown ES kids.

Also, the building may be changing, but I believe they've said many times that the name will still be Thomas S. Wootton. Or is it the "at Crown Farm" addition that's worrisome?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Copilot says:

Under Maryland state law, the process for closing a public school involves several steps to ensure that the decision is made fairly and transparently. The local board of education must consider various factors before making a decision to close a school. These factors include student enrollment trends, the age or condition of school buildings, transportation, educational programs, racial composition of the student body, financial considerations, student relocation, and the impact on the community in the geographic attendance area for the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

The process includes a public hearing to allow citizens to submit their views, adequate notice to parents and guardians of students in attendance at all schools being considered for closure, and a final decision announced at a public session. The final decision must include the rationale for the school closing and address the impact on the factors set forth in the regulation. Additionally, the decision must be announced to the community in the geographic attendance area of the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

It feels like they have done all this except they didn't use the word closure, which makes sense since they are opening the school in a different building.

The Save Wootton people are wasting their money but at least they are helping some lawyers make a nice living.

They haven’t done any of this, and certainly not with the intention of evaluating whether or not Wootton should close because MCPS won’t even call it a closure

Because it's not a closure, it's a relocation (student body staying mostly the same, school administration and teachers staying the same, the only change is a change in building), unless you have a specific definition in the law that says this is actually a closure.

Otherwise, the filing wouldn't have to argue that it's a "de-facto" closure.

1 ES removed and 2 ES added in a different building with a different name in a different city with many new teachers and staff. In other words, it's closing a school and opening a new one by any definition except the one used by people who desperately want to destroy the W schools.

The one ES didn’t want to be with your community. Adding two ES is reasonable. Where is the issue? All schools are having changes.

False. Cold Spring said they wanted to stay with Wootton AT Wootton. But if Wootton was closed and the kids moved to Crown, they preferred the closer option of Churchill.

Sounds like a win. Lots of schools and students are being moved. Why do you think you are so special? Maybe crown will be better. At least those in it will not get sick from the mold. Do you know what long term exposure to mold will do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn't something like 75% of the student body *not* changing? That seems standard for what other schools are going through. QO is losing 2(?) elementary schools in FRES and BS, right? I think Poolesville is changing by about 50% with the loss of the magnet and replacing that population with the Darnestown ES kids.

Also, the building may be changing, but I believe they've said many times that the name will still be Thomas S. Wootton. Or is it the "at Crown Farm" addition that's worrisome?

Call it Thomas S. Wooton Crown Farm. Done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Copilot says:

Under Maryland state law, the process for closing a public school involves several steps to ensure that the decision is made fairly and transparently. The local board of education must consider various factors before making a decision to close a school. These factors include student enrollment trends, the age or condition of school buildings, transportation, educational programs, racial composition of the student body, financial considerations, student relocation, and the impact on the community in the geographic attendance area for the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

The process includes a public hearing to allow citizens to submit their views, adequate notice to parents and guardians of students in attendance at all schools being considered for closure, and a final decision announced at a public session. The final decision must include the rationale for the school closing and address the impact on the factors set forth in the regulation. Additionally, the decision must be announced to the community in the geographic attendance area of the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

It feels like they have done all this except they didn't use the word closure, which makes sense since they are opening the school in a different building.

The Save Wootton people are wasting their money but at least they are helping some lawyers make a nice living.

No, they are wasting our tax dollars because MCPS will have to defend this frivolous law suit. I hope for a SLAP response (where lovers have to pay winners legal fees)

Were you equally upset when MCPS decided to go all the way to SCOTUS in Mahmoud v. Taylor?

Dad's.

Oh, not this irrelevant stuff again.

Also, SLAPP doesn't apply and it probably won't be too expensive to litigate because it goes to administrative judges.

Mahmoud was litigated by MCPS on ideological grounds. It had an easy off ramp, but it refused to take it.

Prime example of wasted litigation funds by MCPS.

And is the boundary study somehow ideological? They moved a high school because enrollment didn't support opening a new one and they even kept the majority of the boundary together.

The references to Mahmoud are irrelevant.

So it is ok to waste taxpayer money on trendy ideological cases but not on boring procedural cases. Is that your point?

Not PP but actually, yes. I am proud to be part of a system that fights to ensure that religious fanatics don't overtake our schools and that all humans are seen as equal and worthy of inclusion in our curriculum. Although it was a lot of money to spend, it was money spent on an important principle. This will be money spent (wasted) because Wootton parents are big mad about getting bad real estate advice which is not a principle or ethical issue to defend.

Wootton parents are fighting because they believe (rightly or wrongly) that moving to a new school will hurt their children academically. The whole real estate angle is completely bogus and constructed by haters to discredit them.

The fight that you are so proud of was to divert school resources so that every student can learn to spell MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA+, while math and English scores are declining.

Ok so say more about why they believe moving to a new building with all the best equipment will hurt their kids academically? Because they'll now be in school with kids whose address is in Gaithersburg and suddenly those kids will be valedictorians and take precious LARLA's esteem? Of course not: LARLA will still be top of the class, maybe even a higher rank, but they believe the average scores of the school will go down and their homes will therefore no longer be worth as much money. This is actually not at all about precious LARLA, it is SOLELY about home values.
And what kind of a name is LARLA anyway??????

[Anonymous]

Imagine paying all your high taxes for decades, only to have your local school closed down and your students bussed miles away to another community. Like putting away money for a new car, only to have it given to your neighbors on the next block over, who offer to let you come and use it instead of getting your own.
I hope they prevail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Copilot says:

Under Maryland state law, the process for closing a public school involves several steps to ensure that the decision is made fairly and transparently. The local board of education must consider various factors before making a decision to close a school. These factors include student enrollment trends, the age or condition of school buildings, transportation, educational programs, racial composition of the student body, financial considerations, student relocation, and the impact on the community in the geographic attendance area for the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

The process includes a public hearing to allow citizens to submit their views, adequate notice to parents and guardians of students in attendance at all schools being considered for closure, and a final decision announced at a public session. The final decision must include the rationale for the school closing and address the impact on the factors set forth in the regulation. Additionally, the decision must be announced to the community in the geographic attendance area of the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

It feels like they have done all this except they didn't use the word closure, which makes sense since they are opening the school in a different building.

The Save Wootton people are wasting their money but at least they are helping some lawyers make a nice living.

No, they are wasting our tax dollars because MCPS will have to defend this frivolous law suit. I hope for a SLAP response (where lovers have to pay winners legal fees)

Were you equally upset when MCPS decided to go all the way to SCOTUS in Mahmoud v. Taylor?

Dad's.

Oh, not this irrelevant stuff again.

Also, SLAPP doesn't apply and it probably won't be too expensive to litigate because it goes to administrative judges.

Mahmoud was litigated by MCPS on ideological grounds. It had an easy off ramp, but it refused to take it.

Prime example of wasted litigation funds by MCPS.

And is the boundary study somehow ideological? They moved a high school because enrollment didn't support opening a new one and they even kept the majority of the boundary together.

The references to Mahmoud are irrelevant.

So it is ok to waste taxpayer money on trendy ideological cases but not on boring procedural cases. Is that your point?

Not PP but actually, yes. I am proud to be part of a system that fights to ensure that religious fanatics don't overtake our schools and that all humans are seen as equal and worthy of inclusion in our curriculum. Although it was a lot of money to spend, it was money spent on an important principle. This will be money spent (wasted) because Wootton parents are big mad about getting bad real estate advice which is not a principle or ethical issue to defend.

Wootton parents are fighting because they believe (rightly or wrongly) that moving to a new school will hurt their children academically. The whole real estate angle is completely bogus and constructed by haters to discredit them.

The fight that you are so proud of was to divert school resources so that every student can learn to spell MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA+, while math and English scores are declining.

It’s a small group and not all are even parent. They make the rest of the Wootton parents look bad. The kids we know are thrilled for a new school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Copilot says:

Under Maryland state law, the process for closing a public school involves several steps to ensure that the decision is made fairly and transparently. The local board of education must consider various factors before making a decision to close a school. These factors include student enrollment trends, the age or condition of school buildings, transportation, educational programs, racial composition of the student body, financial considerations, student relocation, and the impact on the community in the geographic attendance area for the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

The process includes a public hearing to allow citizens to submit their views, adequate notice to parents and guardians of students in attendance at all schools being considered for closure, and a final decision announced at a public session. The final decision must include the rationale for the school closing and address the impact on the factors set forth in the regulation. Additionally, the decision must be announced to the community in the geographic attendance area of the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

It feels like they have done all this except they didn't use the word closure, which makes sense since they are opening the school in a different building.

The Save Wootton people are wasting their money but at least they are helping some lawyers make a nice living.

No, they are wasting our tax dollars because MCPS will have to defend this frivolous law suit. I hope for a SLAP response (where lovers have to pay winners legal fees)

Were you equally upset when MCPS decided to go all the way to SCOTUS in Mahmoud v. Taylor?

Dad's.

Oh, not this irrelevant stuff again.

Also, SLAPP doesn't apply and it probably won't be too expensive to litigate because it goes to administrative judges.

Mahmoud was litigated by MCPS on ideological grounds. It had an easy off ramp, but it refused to take it.

Prime example of wasted litigation funds by MCPS.

And is the boundary study somehow ideological? They moved a high school because enrollment didn't support opening a new one and they even kept the majority of the boundary together.

The references to Mahmoud are irrelevant.

So it is ok to waste taxpayer money on trendy ideological cases but not on boring procedural cases. Is that your point?

Not PP but actually, yes. I am proud to be part of a system that fights to ensure that religious fanatics don't overtake our schools and that all humans are seen as equal and worthy of inclusion in our curriculum. Although it was a lot of money to spend, it was money spent on an important principle. This will be money spent (wasted) because Wootton parents are big mad about getting bad real estate advice which is not a principle or ethical issue to defend.

Wootton parents are fighting because they believe (rightly or wrongly) that moving to a new school will hurt their children academically. The whole real estate angle is completely bogus and constructed by haters to discredit them.

The fight that you are so proud of was to divert school resources so that every student can learn to spell MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA+, while math and English scores are declining.

Ok so say more about why they believe moving to a new building with all the best equipment will hurt their kids academically? Because they'll now be in school with kids whose address is in Gaithersburg and suddenly those kids will be valedictorians and take precious LARLA's esteem? Of course not: LARLA will still be top of the class, maybe even a higher rank, but they believe the average scores of the school will go down and their homes will therefore no longer be worth as much money. This is actually not at all about precious LARLA, it is SOLELY about home values.
And what kind of a name is LARLA anyway??????

Families in Crown are wealthier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Copilot says:

Under Maryland state law, the process for closing a public school involves several steps to ensure that the decision is made fairly and transparently. The local board of education must consider various factors before making a decision to close a school. These factors include student enrollment trends, the age or condition of school buildings, transportation, educational programs, racial composition of the student body, financial considerations, student relocation, and the impact on the community in the geographic attendance area for the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

The process includes a public hearing to allow citizens to submit their views, adequate notice to parents and guardians of students in attendance at all schools being considered for closure, and a final decision announced at a public session. The final decision must include the rationale for the school closing and address the impact on the factors set forth in the regulation. Additionally, the decision must be announced to the community in the geographic attendance area of the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

It feels like they have done all this except they didn't use the word closure, which makes sense since they are opening the school in a different building.

The Save Wootton people are wasting their money but at least they are helping some lawyers make a nice living.

They haven’t done any of this, and certainly not with the intention of evaluating whether or not Wootton should close because MCPS won’t even call it a closure

Because it's not a closure, it's a relocation (student body staying mostly the same, school administration and teachers staying the same, the only change is a change in building), unless you have a specific definition in the law that says this is actually a closure.

Otherwise, the filing wouldn't have to argue that it's a "de-facto" closure.

1 ES removed and 2 ES added in a different building with a different name in a different city with many new teachers and staff. In other words, it's closing a school and opening a new one by any definition except the one used by people who desperately want to destroy the W schools.

The one ES didn’t want to be with your community. Adding two ES is reasonable. Where is the issue? All schools are having changes.

False. Cold Spring said they wanted to stay with Wootton AT Wootton. But if Wootton was closed and the kids moved to Crown, they preferred the closer option of Churchill.

Im sure they did

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Copilot says:

Under Maryland state law, the process for closing a public school involves several steps to ensure that the decision is made fairly and transparently. The local board of education must consider various factors before making a decision to close a school. These factors include student enrollment trends, the age or condition of school buildings, transportation, educational programs, racial composition of the student body, financial considerations, student relocation, and the impact on the community in the geographic attendance area for the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

The process includes a public hearing to allow citizens to submit their views, adequate notice to parents and guardians of students in attendance at all schools being considered for closure, and a final decision announced at a public session. The final decision must include the rationale for the school closing and address the impact on the factors set forth in the regulation. Additionally, the decision must be announced to the community in the geographic attendance area of the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

It feels like they have done all this except they didn't use the word closure, which makes sense since they are opening the school in a different building.

The Save Wootton people are wasting their money but at least they are helping some lawyers make a nice living.

They haven’t done any of this, and certainly not with the intention of evaluating whether or not Wootton should close because MCPS won’t even call it a closure

Because it's not a closure, it's a relocation (student body staying mostly the same, school administration and teachers staying the same, the only change is a change in building), unless you have a specific definition in the law that says this is actually a closure.

Otherwise, the filing wouldn't have to argue that it's a "de-facto" closure.

1 ES removed and 2 ES added in a different building with a different name in a different city with many new teachers and staff. In other words, it's closing a school and opening a new one by any definition except the one used by people who desperately want to destroy the W schools.

That was part of the boundary study.

Unless you want to argue that Northwest was closed because they had 2 new ES added.

Also, are you also arguing that because admins and teachers leave, that's somehow a closure? My ES has had 3 principals, is each time a closure?

I'm saying it's a different student body in a different building with a different name in a different city with many new teachers and staff. Quite literally everything is changing. The only people pretending it's not a closure are east county W school haters.

The only difference between what's happening with Northwest and Wootton is Wootton is getting a brand new building in a new location.

You know there's no case when they have to use words like "de facto" or have to use irrelevant things like "another city" when the student body ranges over Gaithersburg, Rockville, and North Potomac and the building is only 3 miles away. I'm guessing they hope the administrative judge won't look at a map?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Copilot says:

Under Maryland state law, the process for closing a public school involves several steps to ensure that the decision is made fairly and transparently. The local board of education must consider various factors before making a decision to close a school. These factors include student enrollment trends, the age or condition of school buildings, transportation, educational programs, racial composition of the student body, financial considerations, student relocation, and the impact on the community in the geographic attendance area for the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

The process includes a public hearing to allow citizens to submit their views, adequate notice to parents and guardians of students in attendance at all schools being considered for closure, and a final decision announced at a public session. The final decision must include the rationale for the school closing and address the impact on the factors set forth in the regulation. Additionally, the decision must be announced to the community in the geographic attendance area of the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

It feels like they have done all this except they didn't use the word closure, which makes sense since they are opening the school in a different building.

The Save Wootton people are wasting their money but at least they are helping some lawyers make a nice living.

They haven’t done any of this, and certainly not with the intention of evaluating whether or not Wootton should close because MCPS won’t even call it a closure

Because it's not a closure, it's a relocation (student body staying mostly the same, school administration and teachers staying the same, the only change is a change in building), unless you have a specific definition in the law that says this is actually a closure.

Otherwise, the filing wouldn't have to argue that it's a "de-facto" closure.

1 ES removed and 2 ES added in a different building with a different name in a different city with many new teachers and staff. In other words, it's closing a school and opening a new one by any definition except the one used by people who desperately want to destroy the W schools.

That was part of the boundary study.

Unless you want to argue that Northwest was closed because they had 2 new ES added.

Also, are you also arguing that because admins and teachers leave, that's somehow a closure? My ES has had 3 principals, is each time a closure?

I'm saying it's a different student body in a different building with a different name in a different city with many new teachers and staff. Quite literally everything is changing. The only people pretending it's not a closure are east county W school haters.

Just to clarify: 1) 75% Same student body 2) different building-YES 3) Same name 4) different city-YES but the borders are crazy close together and the total distance between schools is 3 miles 4) many new techers and staff-not unless the current teachers choose not to go. Quite literally, everything is not changing.

Their "in a different city" complaint is the most inane. This is a countywide school district. Students all over MoCo are zoned to schools with addresses in a different city than their home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Copilot says:

Under Maryland state law, the process for closing a public school involves several steps to ensure that the decision is made fairly and transparently. The local board of education must consider various factors before making a decision to close a school. These factors include student enrollment trends, the age or condition of school buildings, transportation, educational programs, racial composition of the student body, financial considerations, student relocation, and the impact on the community in the geographic attendance area for the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

The process includes a public hearing to allow citizens to submit their views, adequate notice to parents and guardians of students in attendance at all schools being considered for closure, and a final decision announced at a public session. The final decision must include the rationale for the school closing and address the impact on the factors set forth in the regulation. Additionally, the decision must be announced to the community in the geographic attendance area of the school proposed to be closed and the schools to which students will be relocating.

It feels like they have done all this except they didn't use the word closure, which makes sense since they are opening the school in a different building.

The Save Wootton people are wasting their money but at least they are helping some lawyers make a nice living.

No, they are wasting our tax dollars because MCPS will have to defend this frivolous law suit. I hope for a SLAP response (where lovers have to pay winners legal fees)

Were you equally upset when MCPS decided to go all the way to SCOTUS in Mahmoud v. Taylor?

Dad's.

Oh, not this irrelevant stuff again.

Also, SLAPP doesn't apply and it probably won't be too expensive to litigate because it goes to administrative judges.

Mahmoud was litigated by MCPS on ideological grounds. It had an easy off ramp, but it refused to take it.

Prime example of wasted litigation funds by MCPS.

And is the boundary study somehow ideological? They moved a high school because enrollment didn't support opening a new one and they even kept the majority of the boundary together.

The references to Mahmoud are irrelevant.

So it is ok to waste taxpayer money on trendy ideological cases but not on boring procedural cases. Is that your point?

Not PP but actually, yes. I am proud to be part of a system that fights to ensure that religious fanatics don't overtake our schools and that all humans are seen as equal and worthy of inclusion in our curriculum. Although it was a lot of money to spend, it was money spent on an important principle. This will be money spent (wasted) because Wootton parents are big mad about getting bad real estate advice which is not a principle or ethical issue to defend.

Wootton parents are fighting because they believe (rightly or wrongly) that moving to a new school will hurt their children academically. The whole real estate angle is completely bogus and constructed by haters to discredit them.

The fight that you are so proud of was to divert school resources so that every student can learn to spell MMIWG2SLGBTQQIA+, while math and English scores are declining.

It’s a small group and not all are even parent. They make the rest of the Wootton parents look bad. The kids we know are thrilled for a new school.

I followed this off and on this spring and I was always surprised at who the voices of "Save Wootton" were. They seemed to be parents with very small children, much too young to be at Wootton, or older adults whose children had long ago graduated from the school. It was more rare to see current parents asking to save their school and I personally don't recall seeing any current students asking to stay in the failing building.